From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CFFDC61DD8 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 20:44:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D98142222E for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 20:44:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388062AbgKPUoV (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:44:21 -0500 Received: from baldur.buserror.net ([165.227.176.147]:47068 "EHLO baldur.buserror.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727891AbgKPUoR (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:44:17 -0500 Received: from [2601:449:8480:af0:12bf:48ff:fe84:c9a0] by baldur.buserror.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kel5l-0005ry-Lt; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:27:13 -0600 Message-ID: From: Scott Wood To: Segher Boessenkool , =?UTF-8?Q?F=C4=81ng-ru=C3=AC_S=C3=B2ng?= Cc: Arnd Bergmann , kbuild-all@lists.01.org, kernel test robot , Brian Cain , Alan Modra , Masahiro Yamada , linuxppc-dev , Nick Desaulniers , LKML , clang-built-linux , Nathan Chancellor , Linus Torvalds Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:27:12 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20201114005015.GZ2672@gate.crashing.org> References: <202011131146.g8dPLQDD-lkp@intel.com> <20201113190824.GA1477315@ubuntu-m3-large-x86> <20201113200444.GA1496675@ubuntu-m3-large-x86> <20201114002037.GW2672@gate.crashing.org> <20201114005015.GZ2672@gate.crashing.org> Organization: Red Hat Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2601:449:8480:af0:12bf:48ff:fe84:c9a0 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: segher@kernel.crashing.org, maskray@google.com, arnd@kernel.org, kbuild-all@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com, bcain@codeaurora.org, amodra@gmail.com, masahiroy@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, ndesaulniers@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com, natechancellor@gmail.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: oss@buserror.net Subject: Re: Error: invalid switch -me200 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 08 May 2019 21:11:16 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on baldur.buserror.net) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2020-11-13 at 18:50 -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 04:37:38PM -0800, Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 4:23 PM Segher Boessenkool > > wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 12:14:18PM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > > > > > > Error: invalid switch -me200 > > > > > > > Error: unrecognized option -me200 > > > > > > > > > > > > 251 cpu-as-$(CONFIG_E200) += -Wa,-me200 > > > > > > > > > > > > Are those all broken configs, or is Kconfig messed up such that > > > > > > randconfig can select these when it should not? > > > > > > > > > > Hmmm, looks like this flag does not exist in mainline binutils? > > > > > There is > > > > > a thread in 2010 about this that Segher commented on: > > > > > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/9859E645-954D-4D07-8003-FFCD2391AB6E@kernel.crashing.org/ > > > > > > > > > > Guess this config should be eliminated? > > > > > > The help text for this config options says that e200 is used in 55xx, > > > and there *is* an -me5500 GAS flag (which probably does this same > > > thing, too). But is any of this tested, or useful, or wanted? > > > > > > Maybe Christophe knows, cc:ed. > > > > CC Alan Modra, a binutils global maintainer. > > > > Alan, can the few -Wa,-m* options deleted from arch/powerpc/Makefile ? > > All the others work fine (and are needed afaics), it is only -me200 that > doesn't exist (in mainline binutils). Perhaps -me5500 will work for it > instead. According to Wikipedia e200 is from mpc55xx (for which I don't see any platform support having ever been added). e5500 is completely different (64- bit version of e500mc). -Scott